Al, I will support your comments below.
 
My point is..while they are not obligated..it is just common sense
relationship and image management to do so. It makes it so "shady"
not to have transparency on their web-site.
 
Typical of UCD. I just don't "get" them at all. From a business
perspective
it would seem UCD would prefer to protect an asset such as Mr. Fenton.
 
Do they know what it would cost them to train someone into his position?

 
If someone replaced him with prior experience it would still take quite
a
bit of time to build the relationships necessary to fulfill his position
or to have 
the real "know-how" to partially fill his shoes. Regardless of any
"politics" 
involved, it doesn't make sense at the bottom-line.
 
If I were John, I would feel a bit insulted by the Board of Directors.
 
Where is their business savvy? Were is their loyalty? 
 
Oh..I forgot..where is their statement again?  
 
S
 
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 7:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [UC] Tom Fenton on ABC News
 
In a message dated 5/23/2007 11:18:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
does anyone know how/where/when this official statement will 
be made public?
The UCReview did carry it in the article. It was one paragraph near the
end.
 
And Tony is correct in that UCD wasn't obligated in any specific way to
release this statement, nor are they obligated to disclose what they're
doing to investigate the incident, etc.
 
But what they're "obligated" to do is one thing. Something entirely
different is what an organization should do if it's trying to press an
initiative that will take taxpayers' money under force of law, and have
a quasi-governmental authority over the neighborhood and its evolution.
Especially in view of the concern expressed by many in this community
about lack of transparency, programs that do not reflect the vision of
the vast majority of stakeholders, the secretive way in which the
"steering committee" was selected &c &c &c.
 
What Wendell Lewis and the $74,000 flackette are doing is proving the
point made by the opponents of the NID, that the proposed organization
will not operate in the open. 
 
Al Krigman
Left of Alexander the Great and Bucephalis (didn't want to bring in the
guy who rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, Michael)



  _____  

See what's free at AOL.com
<http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> . 

Reply via email to